But assuming the universe being a deterministic system (or even science's logical-mathematical laws and structures being real) is outdated for about 50-100 years already: it's either indemostrable or plain false...
However, according with Schopenhauer (and if I remember well), we can never be truly free anyway because, even if we could ultimately do whatever we want (wich we can't, of course: we aren't Haruhis), we can't ultimately want whatever we want... i.e. that many (if not each and everyone) of the actions that we consider a product of our own individual will/volition, might very well be a product of necessity: something we really do just to survive the outside's pressures, in a world wich extension exceeds our individual lives and framings (both in space and time), thus rendering our acts as inauthentic choices...
Nevertheless, according with (the 1st) Wittgenstein, true free actions (as the ground for ethical choices) can exist but only in the -(inner) eternity of the- present moment, as a rejection of pragmatism: they must be actions that get satisfied just by the very act of performing them, without expecting any adittional reward, avoidance of punishment or anyother form of further outcome from them (wich, incidentally, renders religious ethics as fallacious)...
The problem is: can we ever really live only for the moment?
Even further: do we even really know ourselves (i.e. where one ends and the otherness begins)?
Left for your consideration.
TL;DR Likely, no one can possibly be free in the world. But if a man can be true to himself (whoever that's suposed to be), then he can be free in his heart... Srsly.
Post edited on 10th Feb 2012, 4:51am